Reliability, Validity, and Feasibility of Direct Elicitation of Children’s Preferences for Health States

Crump, R. Trafford; Beverung, Lauren M.; Lau, Ryan; Sieracki, Rita; Nicholson, Mateo

doi:10.1177/0272989x16671925

Cited by 9 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This existing research comparing adult and adolescent preferences was conducted using the CHU-9D instrument and it is unknown whether this result is also valid for other child instruments such as the EQ-5D Youth version (EQ-5D-Y). The feasibility and validity of adolescent preferences is largely unknown, as is the impact of adolescent, adult proxy (adults imagining a child) and adult study perspectives on the preferences obtained for other child instruments [15,16]. It is clear that the choice of values has important implications for utility estimation and resulting policy and practice decisions [12].…”

Section: Survey Design and Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, we know little about how current preference elicitation methods work for children. There are concerns regarding the validity of directly eliciting adolescent preferences, and the age at which children can reliably complete valuation tasks [16]. However, previous research on the CHU-9D instrument has reported that children aged 11-17 years can complete BWS tasks [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Feasibility, Validity and Differences in Adolescent and Adult EQ-5D-Y Health State Valuation in Australia and Spain: An Application of Best–Worst Scaling

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The measurement and valuation of health-related quality of life for and by young people are increasingly important, yet research on the impact of study perspective and validity of preferences obtained from young populations remains limited.Objective The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and validity of collecting EQ-5D Youth version (EQ-5D-Y) preferences from adolescents, adults, and adults from a child perspective. Methods A profile case best-worst scaling (BWS) online survey was administered to representative Australian and Spanish adult (age ≥ 18 years) and child (age 11-17 years) samples. Adults were told to either answer from their own perspective or for a hypothetical 10-year-old child. Marginal best-and worst-choice frequencies, analysis of dominant choices, self-reported difficulty completing the tasks, and time to complete tasks were used to determine the validity of responses.

show abstract

Section: Survey Design and Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feasibility, Validity and Differences in Adolescent and Adult EQ-5D-Y Health State Valuation in Australia and Spain: An Application of Best–Worst Scaling

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The arguments that the taxpayer perspective should be adopted and that completing a valuation task requires abstract thinking both speak in favour of a general population sample [2,[5][6][7]. However, evidence also shows that preferences of children and adolescents themselves can be assessed, and that they place different weights on impairments than adults [8][9][10][11][12][13][14]. Apart from the question of who should provide the values there is the question of which valuation task is most appropriate to use.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Valuation of EuroQol Five-Dimensional Questionnaire, Youth Version (EQ-5D-Y) and EuroQol Five-Dimensional Questionnaire, Three-Level Version (EQ-5D-3L) Health States: The Impact of Wording and Perspective

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Valuations of health states were affected by the wording of the two instruments (EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-Y) and by the perspective taken (child or adult). Objectives: There is a growing demand for value sets for the EQ-5D-Y (EQ-5D instrument for younger populations). Given the similarities between EQ-5D-Y and EQ-5D-3L, we investigated whether valuations of health states were affected by the differences in wording between the two instruments and by the perspective taken in the valuation exercise (child or adult). Study Design: Respondents were randomly assigned to EQ-5D-3L or EQ-5D-Y (instrument) and further into two groups that either valued health states for an adult or for a 10-year-old child (perspective). The valuation tasks were composite time trade-off (C-TTO) and discrete choice experiments (DCE), including comparisons with death (DCE þ death). Members of the adult general population in four countries (Germany, Netherlands, Spain, England) participated in computer-assisted personal interviews. Methods: Two-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and post hoc tests were used to compare C-TTO responses and chisquare tests were conducted to compare DCE þ death valuations. Results: A significant interaction effect between instrument and perspective for C-TTO responses was found. Significant differences by perspective (adult and child) occurred only for the EQ-5D-3L. Significant differences in values between instruments (EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-Y) occurred only for the adult perspective. Both significant results were confirmed by the DCE þ death results. When comparing EQ-5D-3L for adult perspective and EQ-5D-Y for child perspective, values were also significantly different. Conclusions: The results identified an interaction effect between wording of the instrument and perspective on elicited values, suggesting that current EQ-5D-3L value sets should not be employed to assign values to EQ-5D-Y health states.

show abstract

“…Before doing so, however, we need to establish the feasibility of recruiting adolescent participants and the appropriate elicitation methods for measuring health state preferences from this population. A recent systematic review of studies that directly measured preferences in adolescents observed that only 26 out of 74 studies in the past 25 years have reported some form of feasibility, reliability, or validity for commonly used elicitation methods [ 19 ]. To move the field forward, there is a need to better understand how these elicitation methods work with adolescents.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing the feasibility of eliciting preferences for health states from adolescents using direct methods

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMeasuring adolescents’ preferences for health states can play an important role in evaluating the delivery of pediatric healthcare. However, formal evaluation of the common direct preference elicitation methods for health states has not been done with adolescents. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to test how these methods perform in terms of their feasibility, reliability, and validity for measuring health state preferences in adolescents.MethodsThis study used a web-based survey of adolescents, 18 years of age or younger, living in the United States. The survey included four health states, each comprised of six attributes. Preferences for these health states were elicited using the visual analogue scale, time trade-off, and standard gamble. The feasibility, test-retest reliability, and construct validity of each of these preference elicitation methods were tested and compared.ResultsA total of 144 participants were included in this study. Using a web-based survey format to elicit preferences for health states from adolescents was feasible. A majority of participants completed all three elicitation methods, ranked those methods as being easy, with very few requiring assistance from someone else. However, all three elicitation methods demonstrated weak test-retest reliability, with Kendall’s tau-a values ranging from 0.204 to 0.402. Similarly, all three methods demonstrated poor construct validity, with 9–50% of all rankings aligning with our expectations. There were no significant differences across age groups.ConclusionsUsing a web-based survey format to elicit preferences for health states from adolescents is feasible. However, the reliability and construct validity of the methods used to elicit these preferences when using this survey format are poor. Further research into the effects of a web-based survey approach to eliciting preferences for health states from adolescents is needed before health services researchers or pediatric clinicians widely employ these methods.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12887-018-1179-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Reliability, Validity, and Feasibility of Direct Elicitation of Children’s Preferences for Health States

Abstract: The few studies found through this systematic review demonstrate that there is little empirical evidence on which to judge the use of direct preference elicitation methods with children regarding health states.

Cited by 9 publications

References 36 publications

Feasibility, Validity and Differences in Adolescent and Adult EQ-5D-Y Health State Valuation in Australia and Spain: An Application of Best–Worst Scaling

Feasibility, Validity and Differences in Adolescent and Adult EQ-5D-Y Health State Valuation in Australia and Spain: An Application of Best–Worst Scaling

Valuation of EuroQol Five-Dimensional Questionnaire, Youth Version (EQ-5D-Y) and EuroQol Five-Dimensional Questionnaire, Three-Level Version (EQ-5D-3L) Health States: The Impact of Wording and Perspective

Testing the feasibility of eliciting preferences for health states from adolescents using direct methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About